Umso Construction (Pty) Ltd v Lebepe and Others (PR28/13) [2017] ZALCPE 25 (29 November 2017)

Umso Construction (Pty) Ltd v Lebepe and Others (PR28/13) [2017] ZALCPE 25 (29 November 2017)

The court found that the applicant's explanation for the excessive delay in filing the rescission application was wholly inadequate and self-serving. The applicant was aware of the relevant proceedings and orders well before September 2016, and its assertion that leave to bring the application was granted by the court's order of 12 September 2016 was rejected as contrived. The delay of over two years was extreme, and the interests of justice did not support granting condonation or rescission. The court held that where the delay is excessive and the explanation amounts to no explanation at all, condonation must be refused without considering prospects of success. The rescission application...

Citation
[2017] ZALCPE 25
Parties
Applicant: Umso Construction (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Wellington Lebepe; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Commissioner Vuyani Nosindwa
Court
Labour Court Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 November 2017
Case Number
PR28/13
Procedural Posture
Rescission Application / Judgment on Application for Rescission and Condonation
Outcome
Both the application for condonation and the application for rescission are dismissed with costs.
Judges
E Tlhotlhalemaje
Legal Topics
Rescission of Judgment, Condonation, Unfair Dismissal, Default Judgment, Review of Arbitration Award
Labour Law Civil Procedure Rescission of Judgment Condonation Unfair Dismissal Default Judgment Review of Arbitration Award

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Umso Construction (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Wellington Lebepe

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Commissioner Vuyani Nosindwa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Rescission Application / Judgment on Application for Rescission and Condonation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has shown sufficient cause for condonation of the late filing of the rescission application.
  2. 2 Whether the rescission application against the default order of 14 May 2014 should be granted.
  3. 3 Whether the interests of justice require the granting of condonation and rescission in the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's explanation for the excessive delay in filing the rescission application was wholly inadequate and self-serving. The applicant was aware of the relevant proceedings and orders well before September 2016, and its assertion that leave to bring the application was granted by the court's order of 12 September 2016 was rejected as contrived. The delay of over two years was extreme, and the interests of justice did not support granting condonation or rescission. The court held that where the delay is excessive and the explanation amounts to no explanation at all, condonation must be refused without considering prospects of success. The rescission application...

Court Disposition

Both the application for condonation and the application for rescission are dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for condonation for the late filing of the rescission application is dismissed.
  • The application for the rescission of the order granted by Lallie J on 14 May 2014 is dismissed.